« Law - National look at voter ID | Main | Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court issues two today »

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 today (and 16 NFP)

For publication opinions today (3):

In Arthur Beatty v. State of Indiana, an 8-page opinion, Judge Davis writes:

Appellant-defendant Arthur Beatty appeals from his conviction for Voluntary Manslaughter,1 a class B felony. Specifically, Beatty argues that the trial court erred in instructing the jury and that there is insufficient evidence supporting his conviction. Additionally, the State cross-appeals the trial court’s order granting Beatty’s petition to file a belated notice of appeal. Finding that Beatty has failed to establish that he was without fault for failing to file a timely notice of appeal or that he was diligent in requesting permission to file the belated notice of appeal, we reverse the trial court’s order granting Beatty’s petition and dismiss Beatty’s appeal. * * *

Ordinarily, we would remand this matter to the trial court to afford the State an opportunity to present its objections to Beatty’s petition. But under these somewhat peculiar circumstances, the trial court held a hearing on the petition before the proper petition and the State’s written response had been filed. Consequently, the State had an opportunity to articulate its reasons for objecting to the petition and the record adequately reflects those arguments. Inasmuch as we have concluded that the evidence does not support a conclusion that Beatty was without fault in failing to file a timely notice of appeal or that he was diligent in requesting permission to file a belated notice of appeal, we must reverse the judgment of the trial court and dismiss Beatty’s appeal.

In Gibson-Lewis, LLC v. Teachers Credit Union, et al., a 12-page opinion, Chief Judge Kirsch writes:
Appellant-Plaintiff, Gibson-Lewis, LLC (Gibson-Lewis), appeals the trial court’s award of summary judgment in favor of Appellees-Defendants, Teachers Credit Union (TCU) and Prairie Group, Inc. (Prairie Group), which found that Prairie Group presented a valid claim pursuant to Indiana’s personal liability statute.

Gibson-Lewis raises five issues on appeal, which we consolidate and restate as the following single issue: Whether the application of Indiana’s personal liability statute, codified at Ind. Code § 32-28-3-9, is limited to a claimant who is employed as a subcontractor or supplier by the contractor who is owed money by the project owner, or whether the statute extends to a remote subcontractor who lacks a direct employment relationship with the contractor. We affirm. * * *

Mindful of the established case law interpreting the personal liability statute and the statute’s purpose, we conclude that Prairie Group is entitled to assert a claim on funds owed by TCU to Gibson-Lewis pursuant to I.C. § 32-28-3-9. Thus, we affirm the trial court’s grant of summary judgment.

In Nicholas D. Baird v. State of Indiana, a 13-page opinion, Chief Judge Kirsch writes:
On appeal, he raises the following restated issues: I. Whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence of illegal drug activity obtained during a warrantless search. II. Whether the trial court’s delay in providing Baird the jury list pursuant to IC 33-28-4-9 was done in bad faith or was harmful to Baird’s substantial rights. We affirm. * * *

Here, Hauser did not call police dispatch as an anonymous informant to report suspicious activity or the existence of a possible methamphetamine lab; instead, he called to report having seen an explosion and a fire in the woods across the road. * * * The trial court found the search was reasonable given the totality of the circumstances. It also found no evidence that the executed consents were not voluntarily signed. The trial court’s decision that this warrantless search did not violate Baird’s rights under the Indiana Constitution was not against the logic and effect of the facts before it.

Baird contends that the trial court erred by providing him with a jury list just fifteen minutes before trial. IC 33-28-4-9(b), in pertinent part, provides, “the jurors called to service shall be identified long enough before the trial or grand jury session to permit counsel to study their backgrounds.” * * *

We agree that it was error for the trial court to provide the list just fifteen minutes before trial. While cautioning trial judges that the production of timely jury lists is mandated, under the facts of this case, we cannot grant Baird the relief he seeks. * * * There is no evidence in the record before us, nor does Baird contend, that the trial court acted in bad faith. * * * During voir dire, counsel had the same opportunity to interview the jurors and determine their attitudes towards drugs in general and methamphetamine in particular. Based on the evidence presented to the jury, we do not find that the trial court’s delay in producing the list was harmful to Baird’s substantial rights.

NFP civil opinions today (4):

Richard & Jacquelyn Arnold v. New Horizons Home Health Care, Parkview Hospital, Drew Martin Thurber (NFP)

Aaron Israel v. Indiana Dept. of Correction (NFP

Shicotta Coan and Ramona Ward v. Jeremy Boritzki (NFP)

Miranda Wood v. Marion County Office of Family & Children (NFP)

NFP criminal opinions today (12) (link to cases):

Leslie Gordon v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Spencer R. Norvell v. State of Indiana (NFP)

In Re: J.B. (NFP)

Raymond Shook v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jamin Osborne v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Edward Robinson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Kelly Underhill v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Paul M. Thompson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Robert J. Szabo v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jamie Glover v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Henry Washington v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Robert Clark v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on September 26, 2006 12:32 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions